Consider the following simple model of the Mile End Park Beautification Initiative (from the lectures). There are two students, each of whom can choose to plant flowers (F) or not to plant flowers (N). If both students plant flowers, then the (flower appreciation) benefit is 130 to each player. If exactly one student plants flowers, then the benefit is 60 to each player. The cost to either player of planting flowers is c > 0, regardless of the other player's choice. Each student starts (before any costs or benefits) with a payoff of zero. The above assumptions lead to the following game in strategic form. 130 c, 130-c 60 c, 60 60, 60-c 0,0 Suppose that c< 130.

6) You have been assigned to create a new TV game show, and you have an interesting idea that you call, “I WANT TO BE A MILLIONAIRE.”  The basics are: 1) two contestants; 2) the show begins with each contestant being given $1 million (!); and then 3) they begin playing a game that can increase or decrease that $1 million. You worry that the initial outlay of $2 million will stun your producers, so you decide to prepare them with a simpler version of your game that you call: “I WANT $3.” There are four steps in this simpler game: There are two contestants/opponents (who do not know each other and cannot communicate with each other during the game). Each player is given $3 at the start of the game. Independently and simultaneously, each player must choose whether they want to add $0, $1, $2 or $3 to their initial stake of $3. Doing so reduces their opponent’s award by $0, $2, $4, or $6, respectively. Each player knows that their payoff at the end of the game is based on their initial…

Kyoko and Rina are considering contributing toward the creation of a public park. Each can choose whether to contribute $300 to the public park or to keep that $300 for a weekend getaway. Since a public park is a public good, both Kyoko and Rina will benefit from any contributions made by the other person. Specifically, every dollar that either one of them contributes will bring each of them $0.90 of benefit. For example, if both Kyoko and Rina choose to contribute, then a total of $600 would be contributed to the public park. So, Kyoko and Rina would each receive $540 of benefit from the public park, and their combined benefit would be $1,080. This is shown in the upper left cell of the first table. Since a weekend getaway is a private good, if Kyoko chooses to spend $300 on a weekend getaway, Kyoko would get $300 of benefit from the weekend getaway and Rina wouldn't receive any benefit from Kyoko's choice. If Kyoko still spends $300 on a weekend getaway and Rina chooses to contribute…

Jane is interested in buying a car from a used car dealer. Her maximum willingness to pay for thecar is 12 ($12,000). Bo, the dealer, is willing to sell the car as long as he receives at least 9($9,000). What is the Nash bargaining solution to this game?

An old lady is looking for help crossing the street. Only one person is needed to help her; if more people help her, this is no better. You and I are the two people in the vicinity who can help; we have to choose simultaneously whether to do so. Each of us will get pleasure worth a 3 from her success (no matter who helps her), But each one who goes to help will bear a cost of 1, this being the value of our time taken up in helping. If neither player helps, the payoff for each player is zero. Set up this game in strategic form.

Problem: Imagine you have two competing athletes who have the option to use an illegal and dangerous drug to enhance their performance (i.e., dope). If neither athlete dopes, then neither gain an advantage. If only one dopes, then that athlete gains a massive advantage over their competitor, reduced by the medical and legal risks of doping (the athletes believe the advantage over their competitor outweighs the risks from doping ). However, if both athletes dope, the advantages cancel out, and only the risks remain, putting them both in a worse position than if neither had been doping. What outcome do we expect from these two athletes?   Please use ideas like concepts of monopolies, Oligopolies and Game Theory and Factor markets for this scenario.

Three players (player 1, player 2 and player 3) each chooses a positive integer QE {1, 2, 3, . 100}. If all three players choose the same integer Q, each player gets $100/3. If all three players choose different integers, the player with the largest integer gets $100, and the two other players get $0. If two players choose the same integer Q, and the third player chooses a different integer Q', then the player playing Q' gets $0, and the two players who played Q get $50 each. Find 2 Nash equilibriums in this game. ....

7